Definition Key issues \ gape dedd to define mechanlsins Grievance, discipline and redundancy procedures _dfferdnass Between management and employees end oft chapter; you should be able t0 inthe process for resolving Bri ye’ dissatisfaction, its forms of ‘bargaining; f expression refers to those organisational mechanisms which provide a formal regulatory framework for handling specified issues Fad, in so doing, define and limit the exercise of managerial authority and power. The term procedure While you are reading this chapter, you should keep the following points in mind: If management does not deal with its employees fairly and to their satisfac- tion within these organisational mechanisms, the employees may look outside the organisation to the increasing legal definition of employment rights and use the external legal processes to seek financial compensation. Perhaps the only way in which we can judge the effectiveness of these proce- dures is not by how little they are used but rather by how effective they are in constraining managerial prerogative and arbitrary management decisions and actions. Dipindai dengan CamScanner15.2 i Grievance, discipline and redundancy procedures __553 Introduction ‘The inherent desire on the part.of both management and employees to exer control over the work situation implies, Thomson and Murray suggest: thet joint procedures ‘are the best, possibly the only, way of bringing the te sepa, rate control systems to terms with each other", Where such procedures ore negotiated between management and tnions, and involve employee or union representatives in their operation, they represent an important part of the organ isational system of joint regulation: the formal interface between, at an organi. sational level, management and union and, at a more individual level, managers and employees. It is the decisions and practices implemented through such pro- cedures which determine the nature of the management/employee relationship, provide the clearest evidence of management’ intention and by which manage. ‘ment is judged as an employer. While procedures can provide a degree of con- sistency in the way people are treated, management generally secks to retain a degrce of flexibility to treat issues on theit merits Grievances and disputes All organisations, whether trade unions are recognised or not, require some process which allows employees to express, and seek to resolve, dissatisfaction about their work situation (whether related to their terms and conditions of employment, working arrangements or managerial decisions). Although man- agement has an obvious interest in ensuring that employees are not dissatisfied, the grievance and dispute process is primarily an employee mechanism: Br Icis initiated by employees to express and resolve their dissatisfaction. mi It is a process which allows employees to challenge ‘absolute’ management power (in the absence of trade unions, itis often the only process). i Its effectiveness should be judged, therefore, by employee (rather than management) satisfaction with its operation (process as well as outcome) it appears that employees are increasingly turning to the aww to Significantly, : x $n organisational processes. In 1998, redress their grievances rather than relying o JACAS received some 113,000 claims across a broad range of employment jesues?, It has been suggested? that the increase has resulted from employees being more aware of and prepared to pursue their legal rights, the ability to ation and the expansion of union legal ser- obtain significant financial compens leg vices to members coupled with law firms working on a ‘no win, no fee’ basis. Effective grievance procedures may go some way to relieving this pressure Typology of employee dissatisfaction i i ir significance to both employee(s) and management The variety of issues, their significan - cae ee and the different ways they may be presente Dipindai dengan CamScanner———eST 54 Practices, a ee Figure 15.1 Typology of employee dissatisfaction Degree of effect on status quo Formality and level of presentation Matter of interest Individual Gr iroup All employees Extent of em 1 iployees |i fcrms ‘grievance ves likely to be atfected "an OM a number nd OF ico Dipindai dengan CamScannerGrievance, discipline and redundancy procedures 555 involve the use of industrial action on the union’s part if there is a continuing failure to agree. tis perhaps useful to regard complaints, grievances and disputes as overlap- ping segments of a continuum based primarily on the manner and formality of the presentation of employce dissatisfaction. Whether a specific situation is likely to be regarded as a dispute rather than a grievance depends on the degree of formality of its presentation, the organisational level at which ic is initially raised and the extent to which both parties regard the outcome as establishing new terms and conditions of employment. Relationship to collective bargaining See Chapter 9 - — Collective bargaining The grievance/dispute process (see Figure 15.2) is complementary to the collec- tive bargaining process (where it exists), in that it provides employees with a measure of continuing intluence and control over decisions which affect them. A collective agreement is unable on its own, nor is it intended, to provide the means for joint regulation of the full range and variety of situations encountered. ina work situation, The wording of most collective agreements is often impre- cise, or even deliberately ambiguous, and involves the use of ‘may’, ‘reasonable’, ‘where practical’, etc. ~ all of which require clarification as to the precise cir- cumstances in which they will or will not operate. Certainly, Hawkins believed that ‘where a grievance procedure either formally or informally includes collec- tive issues within its scope the dividing line between grievance settlement and collective bargaining becomes increasingly blurred”. The grievance/dispute process is as much concerned with the determination of rules as it is with their interpretation and application It is possible to identify four distinct, but overlapping, ways in which the grievance/dispute process is integral to the collective bargaining system Industrial jurisprudence. Simply, this means that it may be used by employees or union to ensure that management complies with the terms of any collec tive agreement or its own policies and decisions. Many employee complaints may come under this heading and the employee's immediate superior (or the union representative) may be able to provide an immediate answer to, and resolution of, the complaint. However, it would be wrong to assume that the resolution of all complaints or grievances is simply a matter of referring to the appropriate document to find the answer. 1 Continuing administration of collective agreements. As Kuhn pointed out, the imprecise wording of most collective agreements means that ‘few of its pro- visions apply automatically or without some person in authority making decisions about the nature of a given situation and the meaning of the agree- ment”, If employees and union are to maintain the joint regulation estab- lished by the initial collective agreement, they must continue to negotiate its interpretation and application with management as specific situations arise within the workplace, This is achieved by the joint clarification or redefini- tion of the meaning and intention, if not the wording, of the collective agree- ment either through additional formal written agreements or the decisions Dipindai dengan CamScanner17 © Atitudes towards legitimacy \ (andetiectenes formal >, procedures, * Industial power balance Status quo provision SE TORR ay © Uni lateral imposition of solution. . thant of good " " Uso forma proce i Gate ee] - iN Patt of the re . ane Practice, This BUtOTy fi Dipindai dengan CamScannerGrievance, discipline and redundancy procedures 537 arose, it also creates (through precedent) an expectation that its terms may be applied to other groups or in the future should the need arise. Thus, the gains made by one group through the grievance/dispute process may become regarded as terms which should apply to all. Resolution of any failure to agree which arises during negotiations. It is to this aspect of its function, as a formal part of the main collective bargaining system, that the tega ‘dispute’ may be most appropriately applied. ‘The process may requir@@Both parties to submit their case to some external exam- ination by referring the issue to an industry-level disputes procedure, if the organisation is a member of an employers’ association, or by the involvement ofa third party such as ACAS. Whatever method is used, any resolution becomes part of the final collective agreement in the same way’ as the other terms on which there was no failure to agree Thomson and Murray!? found that most formal grievances, as opposed to complaints or disputes, related to either monctary issues (ranging from simple errors of payment calculation to losses of pay or changes in pay associated with payment by results systems, or appeals on job grading and evaluation) or work issues (including allocation of work, transfer of employees from one type of work to another or the physical conditions under which the work had to be carried out). Significantly, they found virtually no grievances arosc in respect of major technical changes because ‘conflict would have been resolved at the plan- ning stage and hence not emerge as grievances’! or because such issues were considered to be negotiated items or disputes, rather than strictly grievances, by the organisations concerned. However, the apparent concern expressed by employees through the gtievance/dispute process may, in reality, be only the symptom of some more fundamental, but less tangible, underlying concern which may influence the operation of the process: 8 Work satisfaction. The satisfaction which employees seek from work, both extrinsic (financial reward or status) and intrinsic (the nature of their work), will vary both between employees and within each employee over time. The loss of ‘work satisfaction’, whether deliberate or inadvertent, often cannot easily be articulated as a specific grievance. This may result in the frustrated employee seeking to enforce ‘due entitlements’ which previously may not have been a matter of concern, A series of what appear to be minor griev- ances may be a reflection of a more general dissatisfaction with the work sit- uation, which will remain unaltered even after the specific grievances have been resolved. Bi Sociotechnical system. Increased formal use of the grievance/dispute process may arise from structural factors associated with the relationship of the employees to their work and management. Where employees feel they have little direct control over their work processes, they may seck to gain more formal control over the managerial decisions which determine their day- to-day work situation by challenging management decisions through the grievance/dispute process. Alternatively, the system may create a perceived separation between employces and their immediate management, resulting Dipindai dengan CamScannerwhich, in other circumstances “D 558 . . of issues «ate formal present . . oy arieee i in te el is informal complaints. The may also ani Where em have been fi a ess to be centralised away fr « deejgione making, Proce’ Y trom ep? ces perceive the decision making P' ” th vdjate management own immediate - aamianecreake . Phe q rainty created by tre ; faptation. Phe instability and uncertaint\ d by frequen, Chang ae ‘ularly with [itele notice, can result in the need for con ho chung ar management IS taking account of employee anNictiog tinual TT arkiR jts decision making. The grievance/dispute process _ ani to vhallenge change, obtain assurance that it is necessary alo he ha so that ir causes the least disruption to them.” fen and authority. Any formal grievance OF dispute which aries within an organisation challenges both management’ right to make the d ecto uni- laterally (process) a ‘well as the actual decision (content). In so far as man- agement wishes 10 satisfy employees by finding a mutually ac eptable solution, the grievance process 5 part of joint regulation within the organisation Salipante and Bouwwen different types rievances contain a complex 5 of conflict (sce Box 15.1) ce to Management may’ 4 point out that most gi and source interrelationship of th nd, asa consequence, the public formulation ofa grievane dlfer from, its privae formulation among employees ~ it 's more likely co be ms of presented asa substantive issue ‘The conversion of latent employce dissatisfaction into manifest for action is influenced by the extent to which the employees accepe the legitimacy and effectiveness of the formal procedures for resolving such issues and the perceived power relationship between the employees and management. The Dipindai dengan CamScannerim These procedures provi Grievance, discipline and redundancy procedures. acceptance and continue . ‘ only a Pere Le oa lol recognised procedures depends | ences or dissatisfaction but abo on emplijee and aon cant en imanner of operetta aah an employes and union satitaction with their union feel that the formal pracelon a eacned within them. 1F employees or union fee thar dhe formal procedures do not provide an adequate meas fn ot » the effective representation and prote Bia : ve | protection of their interests, they may expres their dissatisfaction in other ways "They may, for example, seck © se their own solution by refusing to carry out the work which has the dissatisfaction or, if they lack the pe ‘lateral ae ae a pat ame aa ip in increased absentcism, bour turnover and reduction in morale ¥ ame time, the possession of industrial power may not only enhance the confidence of the individual and group to express dissatisfaction but also strengthen their ability both to ensure that management considers their prob- lems and to influence management's decision in their favour. It may also increase the level of expectation among the members of the group as to what can, or should, be achieved if they use, or threaten to use, their industrial power. Ir is such ‘strategic’ groups which have the greatest capacity to indulge in frac- tional bargaining’ through the formal grievance/dispute process, or, where they feel the formal procedures to be inadequate, to press for their reform or, if necessary, to impose solutions ‘The resolution phase of the process requires some form of dialogue between employees and management. Management's response will be determined by its perception of the employecs’ dissatisfaction and its assessment of the likely implications of any solution for the maintenance of its policies and strategies. Any conflict of interest between employee aspirations and management objec- tives may only be resolved through ‘negotiation’ and the outcome, whether it relates to matters of right or of interest, or concerns a single employee or the whole group, will reinforce or modify the existing pattern of rules. Indeed, the continued use of the process to resolve such conflicts is a constant reaffirmation of the procedural rules. However, management will need to balance compro- mise against the benefit of pursuing the strategies and decisions it has formu fated in the light of perceived business needs - even in the face of strong, cmployee or union objection. Marsh pointed our that ‘there isa sense in which procedure can be too successful. for the effect of procedure is to achieve fcceptable compromise and it may be that such compromise is not always inthe economic or social interest”. i Tt can be argued that both parties have an interest in ensuring the mainte- nance of the formal procedures themselves. This concern for the grievance/dispute process is founded on two main arguments: ia Because any collective agreement is itself a product of an agreed joint nego" tiating procedure and made in ‘good faith” by both sides, itis reasonable to seeurne that both will wish to discuss, and if necessary negotiate, any differs ences between them regarding its further interpretation and application. ide a constitutional forum within which both sides may argue their case and seek to persuade the other on a more or less equal basis, and neither, Marsh pointed out, should ‘attempt to obtain settlements Dipindai dengan CamScannerseo Pradkes su. eae more favourable to itselt industrial power as presstire - c eo not encourage, and indeeg agement will ryt ensure that it does y ta ace yes, unconstitutional action on the part of cmployces OF unio, ‘ font precedes incl a specific elause which precludes industrial Action By SE Eee Ta sags ofthe proxedure have been exhausted, and me aly agent cal ae negotiate under such duress ~ whether acres ca age omy region to dso hence from unofiialindsteal ation. he peel may ako contain a status quo clause, under which the situa. ton por © managements intend decison or action prevails until cither an agement is eahe or the grievance dispute proces is exhausted. This placen the pressure for settlement more on management than on union or employees Unik wage bargaining, where dely in reaching an agreement is to the advan. (age of management, any delay in reaching a settlement over work changes is to ihe advantage of union and employees, by allowing therm to continue to Work a ro male ith they ate satisfied and increasing the pressure. management sr cmaksconesions inorder to secute ther apres the proposed change Pee ha aide by unconstitutional action’ involving the Uy L its changg rn ft ischangs and then negotiate with employees and union afterwards. Certainly nagements removed such status AX0 Provisions during the 1980s 4 Pentre elie, ~stiaasec sp Dipindai dengan CamScanneroe Grievance, discipline and fedundancy procedures _ procedure is intended to encom ivi matters c 0 pass both individual and collecti (Particularly where the issue relates to the interpretation and applicaton of existing collective agreements), it is important that it should clear y identify the hat it shoul if “PPropriate stage, or stages, at which collective isstics may initially be presented. Stages and system of appeals The adoption of a staged approach within the grievance’ procedure organisational reality ~ namely, a hierarchy of roles based on roeasing or sibility and authority. Thomson and Murray noted that the purpose of such an approach, in operational terms, is ‘to ensure that those with effective author- ity ... can be reached in an orderly way and also to provide for a review of deci- sions by a new level of authority at each succeeding stage"!”. However, the operation of the procedure should not become cumbersome and time consum- ing as a result of too many stages. It is essential, therefore, to incorporate only those definable and distinct levels of management authority which can, and should, play an effective role in resolving employee grievances. There are three broad levels at which the procedure operates: @ Within a department. This allows the departmental manager, who has responsibility for ensuring that the department fulfils its productive targets and complies with the organisation's policies and collective agreements, the opportunity to check, and if necessary correct, his or her own decisions or those of a subordinate line manager. Outside the department but still within the organisation. This allows more senior management to assess the issue within the wider context of the organisation's industrial relations position and strategy and, in particular, assess any implications it may have for other parts of the organisation or the farure. fi External to the organisation. This allows for an unresolved issue to be sub- jected to some form of ‘third party’ scrutiny to judge whether management's decision is ‘air’ and, if applicable, in accordance with the provisions of any collective agreement. This may involve using a nationally agreed industry disputes procedure (if the organisation is a member of an employers’ associ- ation) or conciliation/arbitration through ACAS. ‘The apparent ‘staged appeals’ nature of the grievance procedure raises several issues: Management is the sole judge. The internal stages of the procedure gener- ally require employees or their representatives to present their grievance to managers; management is, in effect, judging its own actions which are the cause of the employees’ dissatisfaction. However, some procedures may provide for the final internal stage to be a joint employee/management body Which seeks a consensus (negotiated) decision. Any external stage will, inevitably, involve management and employee(s) (or union) presenting their case for adjudication by cither an arbitrator or, if through an external indus- try disputes procedure, a committee drawn from organisations and unions not involved in the dispute. ‘ Dipindai dengan CamScannerson Prades _ — procedure ceases ifemple ye “ ¥ acceptable to them; at thar Pointy ror decision which Is oe en that “i si vr may es ts am the unwilji. recetve an id no longer have a § OE oat i , " are satislied an the procedure may a teenth neg ots round i fe ‘ isn her " wuthority and requires so of the mana ae wide ory ness of the h eo se which ts a i tar mobo a hi it invol a ‘ Oe : ie * sol ofa more senior mane ato vn be : rin essentially ‘appea * Y procese incu Shi a there can be no logical stop to the Process’, si peas inh i @ ie ‘interpretation and application’ of collective gricvances involVvins ? wen we sven here only the parties at the level at which the agr cement was agreements, WI 7 ' whi he oe can logically say how it should be applied or inte ‘rpreted Independence of each stage. The appeal system, and formal wording of ‘Most grievance procedures, ‘Appears to rest on the assumption that cach level of management dealing with the Srievance is independent in both its dk sion-making role and its relationship to ®Y Previous level of the Procedure, This assumption is incorrect Ine ‘ality the manager at cach Stage of the Pro- * 10 contact ather Managers who have dealr With similar Prob- Om the grievance MAY Bo if it is Unresolved pecialise Manager, The Manager may Simply be OPINIONS On Which Ie Or she may base 4 deci- ra ie case, seeking SOME forny of «y," Course of Action. Thus, ¢ ‘ocedure jg ore One it : Nature of the appeal system Th Dipindai dengan CamScannerGrievance, discipline and redundancy procedures 563 Caaemen Significantly, the Employment Relations Act (1999) has given allemployecs Es he to be accompanied by either a union represen- ; low emp luring any grievance hearing ~ which is define bythe Actas concerning the perormance of ttory, contractual oer ny y the eimployer's that is, it only covers ‘a breach of existing terms of contracts or legal duties and not the pursuit of improsements'™ The further specifies thatthe represaativeis pecmitied vo adda then od ‘confer’ with the employee, but not ‘answer questions’ on his or her behalf. Thus, the legislation not only gives all employe: u : . particularly non- union employees, the legal right to be accompanied but it ao legally defines ic role, which may be used hy some management to restrict the current activities of union representatives in ‘representing’ their members. The legis- lation could also increase the formality of the first stage of the grievance process, Formality of the procedure Time limits. Procedures often specify time limits within which management has to make a response ~ ranging from a few days at the earlier stages to one or two wecks at the later stages. While this is intended to protect employees and union from undue delay by management in considering a grievance, many managers would argue that such time constraints may be insufficient for an adequate consideration of the problem, particularly complex ones, resulting in the issue simply moving to a higher level of the procedure. However, management can, of course, seek to extend the stated time limits by agreement with the employees or union concerned. It should be remem- bered that even with time limits it may take three to four weeks before the internal procedure is exhausted. @ Presentation of grievance in written form. Management is often con- cerned that, without the grievance being formally presented in writing right from the outset, the content ofa grievance is likely to change as it progresses through the various stages of the procedure. This is often regarded by man- agement as a deliberate tactic on the part of union representatives either to Cloud the real issue or fo strengthen their case by moving it away from the specific situation which generated the grievance and into arguments based « onmore general principles. In fact, both union and management perceptions of the character of, and issues involved in, a particular grievance or dispute will inevitably change as it progresses through the procedure. It will be viewed in successively wider organisational and industrial relations contexts. Certainly, any argument that employees ‘must’ present their grievance in 2 written form, particularly in respect of the first stage, ignores the general informality of this stage and may well prejudice the position of those employees who either cannot write or have difficulty in expressing them- selves in a written medium. However, it is good industrial relations practice for management at all levels of the procedure to keep a formal written record of any meetings or discussions. i Integrity of the formal procedure. Finally, the integrity of the formal Brievance/disputes procedures can only be maintained if senior managers, Dipindai dengan CamScannered Practices ity for dealing with grievances to cer 4 cated responsibilty for dealing val employees rain “tin, having allocate ent, do nor subvert it by offering employees, Minion rep f management, : ” policy. Some seni 7 levels of manage icials an ‘open door’ policy Some senior Manage a ives or union otticia A i a sentatives or demonstrate their goodwill on induse "elation. believe th they on en and understanding within the OTB ANIsation bf ‘matters, and! Improve trus epresenitatives free access to phy. vith allowing employees and/or their representatives fice ac : them With their problems. Such an approach, like the senior manager or dir Cctor Why deals with employees’ prievances. while touring the workplace, simply encourages the bypassing of the formal procedural arrangements, Breaches of procedure by employees and union Tepresentatives cannot be condemneg itmanagement itself s aiding and encouraging such breaches, s The grievance ‘interview’ The forma} interface face \ ement and employ ae Procedure is offen referred t as 9 ‘riven bi ‘oul Wrong to assume that the process OF nema these meetin 8. They : Y are an in Baining system (in fee Chapter 13 _ Management een Negotiation between Manag Dipindai dengan CamScanner15.3 Grievance, discipline and redundancy procedures 565 compromise throu fas ty assess the ‘ ough negotiation. ‘The th : me they |. "Thus, management has to c likely implicatiods at ne ible alterna tela le ‘of any possible alternative soluti id iy implica fe solutions, pa . the immediate situation in which the grievance has esata for be ‘itu re. Once the grievance ‘pute has x is important that both ‘ance or dispute has been sett led, it is. imy parties are clear about the details of the decision. ‘This should be recorded writing to the 1 yee! = ne : ¢ employee (s) and representative, It should also be disseminated to st of management in order to help ensure an integrated, eee -ordinated and equitable handling of industrial lations throughout the organisation. ie aR gna TTT Disciplinary action can often be an emotive and contentious issue, particularly when it results in the ultimate sanction of dismissal. IC not only involves subjec- tive concepts of ‘fair’ and ‘reasonable’, right’ and ‘wrong’, but aso concerns the power, authority and status of management. However, there is an absence of feliable data in the UK on the extent of formal disciplinary action. In 1990, Millward et al.2! reported an annual average rate of dismissals of 1.5 per cent (equivalent to 350,000 of the working population), while a survey in 1991 gave a figure of 3 per cent of employees being involved in disciplinary acne (equivalent to 750,000 of the total working population). Whatever the precise figures, Edwards points out that ‘itremains true that the use of disciplinary sanc- tions is widespread’. Significantly, the number ‘of claims in respect of unfair dismissals is only some 45,000 per annum. The formal disciplinary process Human behaviour in organisations is regulated through a pervasive system of poe ormal and informal ‘rewards’ and ‘ponishment, intended 10 ens that employees conform to the behavioural ad performance standards necessary for the achievement of the organisation's business objectives Torrington and Hall define ‘discipline? as the ‘regulation of human activity £0 produce a controlled performance’™ and identify three types oF levels of discipline: “Managerial ~ imposed by the formal authority leadership; Team need for mutual dependence and commitments Self internalised self-control “The formal disciplinary process is that element of the Sct concerned with formal action taken by management against an individual who fils $9 conform to the rules established by management ‘within the organisation’ eis zontrol process in which management has she possesion of authority the unerance of commands and the operation of restichchs Mt sanctions to tneure compliance with those commands™®. Few companies have adopted a traly joint approach to the whole process. While the procedures for applying the Dipindai dengan CamScanner566 Practices, Detention of proces Legislat ion of Defton standards discipin ubject je ‘Bulation, there has been sara como ination of Ne rules, In the 19 Is, and Col Squires poj at Official Publications « em much “softer © Westion of JOint cone, "ove the drew Up of, Substan ive les 6 about Administration Of such ruse oP Bued thae thie te given tha ANY legis, ncUISiOn intg he are OF discipiin © dismissal ret j ofthe fom disci Pros af dco, " concern With terme and wate fo the cole i Petcejy Ues Ja ely in amt : ining s. 15.3). Cony “Dumb, fF ey ements (s Definition F desire st lay Codified jn SPecifc gt scjp Maceo chav, Beneraj Banisaej if Plinary TUles op, Moen ese May ral cules op ind ore likely fone rte gemene under fs deed, May be MWtitege I soy Ne form 2A oh the cn ee py “ees, Me dards, mene Fe Pettorm, 1 OF beh, ra bag mu i ormale ctiog Your St th pa ett Only oP triode Nese nol the cmp is rc teehee re an 1 Va lieve ais con yin ag ‘th igageg asa its Me action liscipy Stands, behaviour fon, sa Fs hen gtY "cere top ates 4. Feedback Of the Chee * 3 Vivian Wich the Ss CSseq ir the itn pea “tiven, 8 of Me a ner CamScani dengan DipindaiGrievance, discipline and redundancy procedures 367 Thus, it has a legislati » it has a legislative phase (the dete f i enforce nana oe et : n " 7 hase (th ef a Ieshanism through the disciplinary procedure), colevieaae nee Jone OF Eee a BY management of initial and resultant performance or oe peuen te emp loye ). e is.a formalised process, generally codified in wrinen d embodying a quasi-judicial sequence of idk i (iene, aera involving submission of evidence by both the paras pleas in mitigatia y the i i wefence and p mitigation, followed by the passing and execution of As with societ X ’s penal system, there are potentially three aims for the f disciplinary process (retribution, deterrence or rehabilitation) ad ieee viewed primarily as either a punishment or training process. The negative (punitive) approach is directed towards retribution or deterrence based on the principle that ‘few people would deny that those who deviate from accepted behaviour ought to experience some sort of unpleasant consequence”, however, it may achieve only the minimum standards of compliance to avoid punishment. The positive (corrective) approach, on the other hang, is directed toward rehabilitation based on a process of educative socialisation to create an attitude in which the individual not only conforms but also supports and is com- mitted to the performance and behavioural standards. However, as Rollinson points out, ‘discipline is more often used to teach people the rules after they have been broken’ and management's behavioural expectations ‘can be highly subjec- tive, and include vaguely held expectations of the right attitudes or spirit of co- operation”. Three important points should be kept in mind: i The positive (corrective) approach is only applicable to less severe offences and sanctions; the slrimate sanction of dismissal is retributive or a deterrent to others. In practice, management is admitting that the differences berween the individual’s behaviour and the organisation’s expectations cannot be rec~ onciled and, therefore, the only solution is to remove the problem individual from the system. Bf Whether any sanction constitutes ‘punishment? depends on the pereeption of the recipient and not the intention of the instigator. While some employees (such ve those whose rewards or carcer progression is linked to formal performance or appraisal reviews) might not lke to recive a formal reprimand because of the possible effect on their carer, this does not mean that other employees will place as much emphasis on such warnings ~ particularly those in manu or lower clerical groups, for whom there may be litte, if any, career prospects. ' The development of responsible autonomy forms of management contro! over labour, through teamworking, empowerment and performance appraisal would’ appear to decrease the need for management co use ad for Ct formal disciplinary action and replace it with more general and regular pet formance ot appraisal review approaches ~ a more positive comeciNt approach. However, Edwards points out that Cee ‘ 7 forms of self-discipline do not indicate necessarily an increase Pui : mitment on the part of employees but rather a greater managerial a i oe control the employee’s day-to-day personal conduct. He notes that, in Dipindai dengan CamScanner— ¢ ‘reluctant to apply their 6 568 = Pract! : s may be ‘reluc eye n amworking, Oh clyng on formal penalties because Prob cers were lel context of ta me ols and manag carly enough’ Furthermore, he anaes thea ere were not identified carly ¢ introduction of HRM strategies has rest, ted in y evidence that the int In his ion te, if al sanctions: little if any ff formal disciplinary control or tradition a reduced use of for essive trend from punishment through corre view ‘any idea of a progre ” selfdiscipline is thus too simple ary act are common}. ions which warrant formal disciplinary action are muMonly The action categorised as follows i is ct — offen Gross or serious misconduc ees Ward i at least severe disciplinary action for a single incident. © Minor misconduct - offences warranting only a verbal or written warning fora single incident, but Progressing to more severe di iplinary action and cventual dismissal for a persistent offender, es Warranting summary dismissal or useful in relation to the Procedural mechanism and the ‘procedures in them- selves tellus little about the disciplinary process’*?, To understand the nature of the process itis necessary to Sramine the basis of the rules them Ives (see Box 15.2), The rules enforced through the iplinary process comprise onh One part of the norms, fl, which regulate the relation, Ships within the orpanis “1d Hill idenritied te derivations (or organisational norm. maemo all members buy internally derived Management norms Predominating as 3 Bement power. : the in PSibIe 10 break Dipindai dengan CamScannerMost managers, because of their own acceptance of the legitimacy of the rules, will tend not to differentiate between aberrant and non-conformist employee behaviour, or will see the non-conformist as, at best, irrational or, at worst, subversive. Consequently, a non-conformist may present the appearance of an aberrant to management (because he or she feels it will be more acceptable and may indeed mitigate the severity of the punishment), while continuing to challenge the rule in his or her peer group. It is possible to argue: M Those rules deriving their legitimacy from society’s general code of conduct or involving a direct challenge to managerial authority are likely to be con- travened by only a small minority of employees because they involve breaches of fundamental socialised norms. Dipindai dengan CamScannerexclusively on the managerial A But thse cuks which ely almost exclusive u pow eed for control over the human part of the production rocess — Ve ‘ample, lateness and poor performance - may well be contravened 4,0 more substantial propurtion ofthe worktorce at one time Or another becg’ they mle a kser degree of wialsaion on the pare OF the employee Dipindai dengan CamScanner: Grievance, discipline and redundancy procedures ——_Siemes dn neiing pens 5p Bs _ 571 nature of the o i nature ganisation’s tolerance limits. whie inde get's limits which, in tum, reinforce the The legal framework ‘The employer's right t ine is f ea evel discipline is founded on the faire of the employee to igations under the contract of employn fh ion ployment, which the ied taw defines as giving honest and faithful service using reasonable ski and care in work, obeying all reasonable orders and not _ 4 committi duct. It is only since the Industrial Relations Act (1971) that 4 cheneecd employec has been able to claim compensation for ‘unfair dismissal’ or seck rein- statement or re-engagement (as opposed to the previous common law ‘wrong: ful dismissal, with maximum compensation equal to the wages for the normal contractual notice period). However, certain groups are excluded: Employees with less than one year’s service. (The length of service qualifica- tion has moved over the lifetime of the unfair dismissal legislation — it started at two ycars in 1971, was reduced to one year, then six months and then back to one year in the 1970s, went back to two years in 1986 and has now been reduced to one year in 1999.) Employees over 65 or their normal retirement age (if less). Where there is a designated contracted-out dismissals procedure approved by the Secretary of State. Until 1995 part-time employees working between eight and 16 hours a week had to have had five years’ service before they could claim unfair dismissal and those working less than eight hours per week were not covered at all. However, this differential treatment was determined" to be indirect discrimination in breach of European law. The subsequent Employment Protection (Part-Time Employees) Regulations (1995) brought iti line with the qualifying period for full-time employees (at that rime two years). However, the two-year period was challenged 2s being indirect discrimination because proportionally fewer svomen could comply with the requirement®, but the Employment Relations ‘Act (1999) has reduced the qualifying period to one year. Tt has also ensured that employees on fixed-term contracts can no longer be asked to waive theit rights to claim unfair dismissal simply because their dismissal results from the hnen-renewal of the contract. This is particularly important with the use of fixed- term contracts as part of increased labour flexibility. “The term ‘dismissaP applies to any situation where the employer terminaces the contract of employment. This may take different forms: im Dismissal with notice or payment in liew of notice for disciplinary or other reasons; oe 8 Summary dismissal without notice or payment in liew of notice (generally for cdscipinary reasons resulting from a formal investigation within the disciplinary process); ' mx Instant dismissal without notice (with or without payment in lieu of notice) for disciplinary reasons, but without any formal investigation into Dipindai dengan CamScanner—_ srr Practices 5 conduct ) the rules of natura U Ju Stic (this is contrary fo 0 ct (Ul | “s conduct ( a the oe an unfair dismis certainly a almost ¢ Present right to p yee has the “ieee ituations the employ = lal vonter, the term “4 ee ‘ilu al. However, in t Employment Tribunal, Employme Mm, cre ‘the employee terry 1 where ‘the ¢ 7 beeen srcumstances such that he is cntit tiv vt umsta r ; is includes vai tr wthoe notice, in re aphek cordier : comma, with i ut oie by reason ot . mpl inate it witho ; invites json is have been developed on ¢ ‘wo approa T the Years i en that for a Constry, first, and Perhaps strongest, line has been thar The first, an ICtive dis. v ‘the e loyer is i I 10 be upheld the employee must show that the Cmploy ‘missal a i f00t Of the conduct which is Significant breach goin to the roo cmploynen OF which shows that the employe ind by one oF more Of the essential terms of 1c n Words, the employ has to showy Mat asingle acy on the pare of the “Mploye, NAS a sufficient by contra amount ¢ "epudiatio, esecond, mo » Hine has held thata Onstructive dis 8sal could b Mstified on the eS Of minoe reaches, py, Of them Mdividualy Mounting to re di OF the co, Ct, provid) taken logeth, T they Amount to Unteas, ‘ction on gf PAN OF the & Ver. Tt has been held ist ‘an cee ty atm 0 vary Mployeer, Cong Itong wy SVC (i . eanie eth Factual op NOt) With 9 Betting Nid of an ap * Narying a Ployce's top OF se j caleuy i ’ Sery tin uated oj © dest, Veen Mplove, ras the "elationshj and employees “ee The Tribunals " Th ini a ‘ a thar constrictive ismissa) May arise iin Peat a managers (such as tsa Sc "pom Cree ation MO bing * legislation Set 6 iy Momaticay "certain ‘fie Unf) ai demerig, ° : Broung. fe The cy | Porat diy, \ C . : y. i rat Pro Ta Hope in * a - d gig als is s Bs , oF ner CamScani dengan Dipindaihealt Ph, the employer must demonseare the 4 Sickness or w issal or ill health sect ‘as the cause of dismi # Reasonable ettorts were male ‘ertai heey loyee’s stat eason ule to as ineluding Consulting a doctor, and that the eae sees hat further absence oy ithe al ' absence or ill health : fecal wa tll health could result in dismiseat 1 a 1¢ dismi Fe oa reasonable because of the nature of the employee's ‘ork and the effect the absence or ill he io S ue * il health had on the organisation and ae of health, at the employee had been informed epee oa ay a 0 Scams a balance between, on the one hand, operational efiicegy and meen absent through sickness or other causes beyond areal Theos ees scheme within the organisation does not, in itself, determine a me an employee is entitled to be absent before dismissal is justified. In Gealing with dismissal because of poor work performance, three specs £ Is the employee incapable or inefficient in the performance of the work? The employer only has to demonstrate reasonable grounds for believing the employee to be inefficient and that this is the reason for the dismissal. In judging inefficiency, ‘management must still require and impose its own standards, atleast within certain limits: that isto say, any standard required or imposed must be a reasonable standard“ Has the employee been warned previously regarding poor work performance? Normally, failure to give any warning that performance is unsatisfactory, and that continued unsatisfactory performance could lead to dismissal, will result in the dismissal being regarded as unfair. The employee should, therefore, be informed as to the nature of the poor work performance, the acceptable standard that is required and the period of time within which to reach that standard Has the employer provided the employee with the necessary reasonable support to improve the work performance? The employer should identify the cause of the poor work performance and, ifit results from lack of training or other factors within the employer's control, provide the employee with reasonable assistance to overcome these problems. Conduct: Apart from unauthorised absence and poor timekeeping, which generally require previous warning(s), most of the offences which come under this heading may justify summary dismissal for one occurrence. However, when dealing with these situations management must carefully examine the circumstances to establish whether they justify dismissal: ing. The employee should be a willing participant to the fight and him or herself against an assault by another 1 Figh not simply defending Dipindai dengan CamScanner= Padies ae : a Ifthe policy of the organisation is only te dismiss the employee. 1 nagement will need to consider what CONStitutES, eh Go hae include verbal oF other ae (is it the first blow or doc er forms of Bg non-violent aggression). a 1 Pring. Generally, the fairness of such ont the employee's work performance, safety or other SPLCIS OF the individual’s behaviour, such as violence, Managemene Needs to be Clear ints mind whether its disciplinary cule relatev, the act of drinking G. the state of being drunk 1 Swearing. Ie is important to differentiate between SWearing as Part of 4 take 0 be agressive, abusi Or insulting. Ir is also ant ¢ : ile acount oftersionor fea i otships Which mighe eee esd ips he pat rend of mPlovee and whether tha RSE 0 Ist — To justify dismissal ‘di Sobedie ness? the ‘struction Dipindai dengan CamScannerGriev. lisciplir ENCE. sepline and redundancy procedures 575 from the employee’ ( isa whee paes § point of view able in dismissing the «1 ig the employee, in refusing the change, Aikinodes employer to have consulted with ing the change and ‘then follow who refuse the new terms, They their own position made must understand that they usually expect the employees and/or unions before ineede the proper procedure in relation to those must have the new conditions explained, ar and given time to come to terms with it They risk dismissal if they cannot comply’ 7 The determinatios i fora ; 5 : resource employer's undertaking) the employer acted reasonably oF unreasonably ta treating [the stated reason) as a sufficient reason for dismissing the employee, and that question shall be determined in accordance with equity and the sub- stantial merits of the case’ (S.6, Employment Act, 1980). Prior to 1980 the employer had ‘to satisfy the tribunal that... he acted reasonably’ ($.57(3), Employment Protection (Consolidation) Act, 1978). The effect of this change was to neutralise the onus of proof and formalise the requirement that the Tribunal should judge the case not by their standards but by those of a ‘reason: able employer Dickens argued that ‘this managerial perspective reduces the applicants chance of winning a case of unfair dismissal In arriving at its decision, the Tribunal will take into account a number of factors: Was the dismissal for an admissible reason? Ht Was the dismissal fair in the sense of equity of treatment between employees (did the employer condone similar behaviour in the past or with other cmployecs)? I Was the dismissal fair in the sense of did the offence or the employee's record justify dismissal as a suitable sanction? Bt Did the employer follow a proper and adequate procedure before arriving at the decision to dismiss? If the answer is ‘yes? on all the above counts then the dismissal will be fair, but if the answer to any one is ‘no’ then the dismissal may be unfair. For example, even though the employee’s action might justify dismissal, if the employer has not deale with it in a proper and adequate procedural manner, the resultant dis- missal may be judged to be unfair. In such a situation the tribunal has to deter- mine the seriousness of the employer's procedural error and what effect it has had on the decision to dismiss, The Tribunal has two broad remedies for an unfair dismissal: reinstare- ment/re-engagement and compensation. 1. Reinstatement or re-engagement. With reinstatement the employee returns to his or her former position and is treated as if he or she had never been dis- missed; re-engagement, on the other hand, is more flexible in that the job may be comparable or otherwise suitable work or with an associated employer. The employer may object to reinstatement or re-engagement on Dipindai dengan CamScannerF 2 LO ‘ : —— ‘Tribunal will then judge nog cas «The Tribunal will IRE NUE Gay Byers PORCNE pratt i Hal employee but also the effiece tht iris im the grounds that th er has ,. jon and other employe, cher the erphiger a a ee organisati : eee whether | Joye might hav e offence, the attitude of othe: OT yee te nature of the offence, Pia th some eecumstances the n between the employee and supervision may Jn some ion be i sible friction betwee! annot compel an employe, Sree The Tribunal car Ployer rat i ee ceed tivideat, but, ifthe eanployer refdses abide to reemploy a dismissed i Tribunal may award an order for reinstatement or re-engagement, the ensation, ae pea absofuey clear in dhe statute that “re a abies en to be the primary remedy” but that the operation of the ee off job security. He found that, although 72 per care oF applicants initially requested feinstatement or ieee fitia Uropped to only 20 per cent by the time ofa Tribunal hearing. The over. qpheining majority of those who changed did so because they perceived there to have been a breakdown in the employment relationship. Thus, it ig fi le to argue that he failure ofthe Tribunals to usc this remedy has been i git ta the wishes ofthe claimants themachncs However, of those that con. tinue to clin “re-employment: only 87 per cent obtained an ores trom | eee eee “i two-thirds of these the employer HeTet Sho were unsticeesefal © the Tribunal considered iq impracti- ne z seeking i Feported thar ae SCS Of Unfair dismissal jg Settled involved ~ NSC over 3 per cones at the "lore, based SEE Would "Based on age PENSE the dismissal, tpq"PlOVee for loss | loyce v0, INclude full of, dismisseg } Fits suet 2 Since th | "Sion tights | Ss. by Seek, at Ing 1 Ward wah = ag by ane ative ! ibang). the gigi OF | ated to, Plieves thay ee j ition, *cepe lower te | ma ny Uren ; aid e “omPensaret Dipindai dengan CamScannerGrievance, and the employee is not entitled to claim psi ver which ire lo of xmings has bert ede nherno of the compensation may be reduced in respect af ent to shih the eibu eh th emplye’ scion come ot deate 7 a possible for the employee to be judged unfairly dismissed but the level of compensation reduced by as much as 80 per cent, On the other hand, an additional award may be made in those very few cases where the Tribunal makes an order for re-instatement or re-engagement but the employer refuses to comply. The Employment Relations Act (1999) has increased the maximum compensatory award to £50,000 and provided for the furure indexation of award limits; but only 15 per cent of awards in 1993-4 were over £9,000 and the average award in 1996 was only £2,499%° - reflect- ing the relative short service of most complainants. The individual must present a claim for unfair dismissal within three months of the dismissal taking place ~ although the Tribunal may, in exceptional cases, decide to hear the case ‘out of time’. There is facility within the procedure for a pre-hearing to assess the merits of the case and its prospects for success. This latter arrangement was introduced in 1980 because of a perceived reluctance of the Tribunals to award costs against frivolous’ or ‘vexatious’ claims and so, as Capstick notes, ‘an applicant who pursued a hopeless case out of ignorance .. OF out of a desire simply to sec what came out in the wash, was nor therefore likely to have to pay his employer's costs even if he lost’. The pre-hearing allows the Tribunal to ‘advise’ on ‘the prospects of success of either the claimant’s or respondent's case and such advice may be taken into account in deciding whether to award costs if the case proceeds and fails. Capstick found that in the first cight months of its operation only ten our of 932 pre-hearings were at the request of the applicant and the remainder were virtually evenly divided between requests from the respondents and requests from the Tribunal chair- person. In 50 per cent ofthe pre-hearings a warning was given against the appli- rent but in only seven cases Was a warning given against the respondent. Out of 170 cases which went to a full Tribunal hearing, 136 were dismissed, 34 suc- ceeded and in only ten cases were costs awarded in line with the earlier warning. Similarly, Wallace and Clifton found a high percentage of withdrawals follow ing a pre-hearing warning about costs. Pethaps more imporcantly they found that pre-hearings also delayed the early stages of ACAS conciliation. There is also a facility for conciliation via ACAS prior to a tribunal hearing. In 1998, 46 per cent of unfair dismissal claims were settled by ACAS concilia- tion, 27 per cent were withdrawn and 28 per cent went 0 a Tribunal. However, Dickens has criticised these conciliated settlements as a cheaper alter- native, for the employer, than going to the Tribunal and argued that ‘despite ‘ACAS statutory duty to pursue settlements on [the basis of re-employment] ‘ACAS officers do not generally attempt to reconcile the parties to the idea of re- establishing the employment relationship ... but merely help arrange the sever ance. termms”®, Significantly perhaps, Concannon has identified that re-employment, usually with conditions, was obtained in the majority of the albeit limited number of cases which were referred to arbitration via ACAS (ie, where ‘the union had exercised its organisation and power to remove the Dipindai dengan CamScanneri NC Of Col idual rights t0 one of, F individual a . matter of ie (Dispute hea 5 v1 ‘atic i the Ener the option of ar ae sisal dexisio Important ower t0 offer he case toa Tribunal, a ice nr aaah ACAS oY on or taking ical tribunal applicany is R- has eer ia typ! employer in the Eseaetonond it amas wel ckens' description of | eee and Conciliation unfair dism ements Dicken: 1 worker dismis pall employment He axbiaton peak once, int ‘characterised by sn ee companies ing ‘male, non ich is ‘cha yhere ‘employ ¢ companies?® pan ge to ons paolae ne oe ach issal than ly provide a : below average from dismissal ‘ribunal system only ‘ : . ris from ind Tribunal yees in smaller com, are ata greater the legislation a ised employee a ee that le eg jon-unionis chieve their Tr would appear ction, for nor ies appear to ac a remedy, and litle job ee well-unionised companies i bargaining Panies; employees in larger, ions representation in the Protresion through fied cle ithin the organisation dismissal proce process and y merely’ meee The discipline and dismissal procedure Most organisations Spproach discipline within a policy framework hich | “scognises the following: BI is the employee's “SPonsibilty £0 follow the o res, *Banisation’s mules and ; Working procediy F Managemen will eck initially to correct an employee's poge Performance or behaviour throu informal counselling by: the employee's immediate i Superior, : : 5 cn Py the formal isciptinary Process Only When informal ina 2s Been unsuecwer wt the actions oF yo fea ae than ies inpproprts*005 of tn “mployee are such © Managemen ICED that ! ployee Will be ¢ : : * rhea unig : ermal disciplined Without aM, agement wip ; = discipline “ek ag Faily a Con Vw ii ‘steNly Ache “dministering 1g Cis to TOVid, j fone may CXerg Provide an °ceptaby, our doce Se its Controy pa Pi e Mech. | lo : ; rds, ; eat Con. cae en Ner in, Which = m ey mene Ch such, a Tshoug bea Wri ae “ “ 7 | a | shoul te to Who, it : Provided yy copy, Plies an a ns PrOpriate e oy a disci, ic ~ manage mene has the au me a oe 7 Ority ty take Such action, = : nh Vel of ner Dipindai dengan CamScanrepresentative or fellow employee @ It should ens: sci irene epsure thar no disciplinary action is eaken without afl in ition an employee is not dismissed for + singh mr of isconduct unless it is geoss misconduct MC ince of @ It should provide the employee with the disciptinayfancton right of appeal against any Howe ci ee eH ot all disciplinary offen need to be dealt with under the same . organisations, because of the particula and the way in which they w pe clablohed iceaas oe vish to handle it, have established s n y have separate proce: dures to deal with absence through sickness and poor work performance. his ret adopted itis imperative thatthe main ccplinary procedure states that ich offences are outside its jurisdiction and w! edure will apply ns j which procedure will apply in such A number of sanctions may be applied under the disciplinary procedure. Verbal warnings. This is the most frequent and least severe penalty. However, it is necessary to distinguish between informal verbal warnings, which are not part of the formal disciplinary procedure and which are frequently administered by a supervisor or manager as part of the day-to-day control of their subordinates, and any formal verbal warning which forms the first stage of the formal disciplinary procedure. These formal verbal warnings should be recorded and the employee provided with written confirmation that a verbal warning has been given. Some organisations, because of these problems, have abandoned verbal warnings as part of the formal process, leaving them entirely as part of the informal process. kz Written warnings. Written warnings should clearly state the offence for which the employee is being disciplined, refer to any previous verbal or written warnings and indicate what future performance or conduct is the likely consequences if there is no improvement. Many have two levels of written warnings ~ a first and final written i ly in very exceptional situations should a final written warning not be followed by some more severe sanction for a future act of indiscipline. mF Supension. It is important to distinguish between a precautionary suspension pending a disciplinary investigation and a disciplinary suspension without pay tea sanction within the formal disciplinary procedure. Many people argue that a suspension without pay is useful because it involves a clear penalty (loss of money on the part of the employee) and, without it, there is no sat isfactory intermediate action between a final written warning and dismissal However, a suspension without pay can only be effected if the terms of the contract (either express or implied) allow for it. Moreover, any suspension, with or without pay, means that the work normally performed by the sus- pended employee is either not done or has to be done by other employees ~ perhaps involving the use of overtime. 1m Transfer or demotion, These may be used as a sanction in their own rightor as an alternative to dismissal. However, they may involve a breach of the expected and organisation warning. Onl 1 \ | Dipindai dengan CamScannercd within the ‘ONtrag, : clearly allowed w ithin ee : ace unless th sent fo any transfer or deme on, ices a = cons go Practices pe employee's a? «the 7 ‘ ci it Was ce, Mon f ceofemploy! ineteenth century ir wa mi for contract ure the ninete ol A breaches of the rules, but today this si ee eno fr avs been thar if the IMOUNE OF the to fie oem has alway as large it could 'DVOlve the is sa ee ra i ere a resonant Initially, the right tw. has chen it ha : lead to res ¢ 7 i afi iprand ead 208 / Ue this onh. aye in ial rip i by the Truck Act (1896) sat th ia employee in was constraine Wares ‘Act (1986) simplitied the legal i fine el monks The extended the Scope to include all lied t0 manua of fines an " sed if it je. ressly . a mens in rope a fine may only be Imposed if ir jy qibressy ‘Pro pn Consoquenilya ontract of employment or the employ ec indi. vided for in the ning Poker a deduction in FESPECE OF retajy Cates agreement chore or stock deficiency is limited to a MAXIMUM oF vorkers for any cash short ; ily wage.” 1Oper cen ofthe employee's poss chily wage 1B Dismisal. & dismissal should only take Place when there is NO other af, tie available, In this event the employer should ensure thar Fines and terna- he dismissa] is it and reasonable and jn accordance with, both the disciplinary Procedure j and framework i A number of further Pets need to be Sonsidered jy the Peration Of th i Aiscipinary Procedure: | © Lnployee Tebresentation Most Procedures allow he SMployee to by companied by a union Tepresentay OF Fellow, Ployce. erally the ‘ole Of the Union Presenative ig ch ’ wee © presen, ¢ empl EC'S case and ‘ens 'ement COnducts the Interview di i tir tenable ma, n However, ty I oF the a pnary Jovan’ is esc me ore 2 Tole of 4] C fe] W en "ee? ‘| 'Banisa i ne qt f the employ at my sem 90a on ing the reat orgre Scquene eh Penied Sica With Brievanee tations eet dtas a ye at tie so 1Prievances, the Ploy i “Presentag; al role, 1 CS the 7 = itive» fan we Bh 06 be “compa, ied | ithe Ct (199 ) has | eset in 4 formal P Vee lurin, Ascipy tet i Presen.- Hower be eign lng oy Some other Plinary jy, 8 Which y refer ‘sting role fy Mother a eae ny fone we inc Mion “Bain, th Orker? | “i Ployee, Ut noe eg Mitreg to Y be “Stricteg by the and ‘confer With the > Within a spec. i highe, levey of T throu ha Spe. Cla} {Sablisheg 4 joing aS Wey aS man. ner Dipindai dengan CamScani ipGrievance, discipline and fedundancy procedures suspended withou It pay, demoted o1 i Out pay de even dismissed for ye even though the third offence, on its own, mich seo anather offence, procedure should. specify of mtn a hot justify dismissal, The : “ veord: of sciphi y i il removed fiom the employee's rund after a speed, Suen il be three months to two years ‘ pecified time (ranging fr ‘ wing from won eee *derendingon the severity ofthe offence ane sane, vee's conduct is satisfactory over that period. 1 ton) if ahe employer's conde ) hat perioxl. This may be coupled the employee's right to examine his or her personnel fi ensure that it has been done. | Disciplina , 2 inary action grin A union rpreentatine, No dsiphinary action ning should be taken against a union ; ri ' representative, whether asa result of his or her actions as a represent 7 | ative or as an employee, before the case has been discussed with the senior union representative or full-time official. This does not mean that the disciplinary action has to be agreed but simply that the senior representative or full-time official is aware of the circumstances and planned management action The disciplinary interview This is the point at which the formal control mechanism is actually applied ‘The supervisor or manager must remember, throughout, that he or she is pros- ccutor, judge and jucy (presenting the evidence against the employee and then weighing up the evidence from both sides and making a decision as to whether the employec’s actions justify disciplinary action). In preparing for the inter- view, the manager must: ta Be satisfied that there isa prima faci case that the employee's performance is inadequate or his or her behaviour has contravened » rule; Decide whether oF not it is a matter for formal disciplinary action; i Determine, in the light of the employee's past record, what stage of the disciplinary procedure has been reached and what range of penalties are available should the facts of the case be proved i Ensure that the employee is advised that it is a disciplinary interview in order to prepare his or her case and, f necessary, arrange for the attendance of representative and/or witnesses ‘There are two distinct stages to the disciplinary interview: 1. Establishing the facts ofthe ease. A disciplinary interview will in practice, only take place when management already believes, prima facie, that there has been a breach of the organisation’s rules by the employee. Thus, from man- agement’ side, the facts are generally established prior to the actual inter- waew either by the collection of data (time-keeping, absence, poor work performance, tc.) or by interviewing witnesses in cases clating 10 the per- Penal conduct of the empléyee. However, this information has to be reviewed with the employee present and having the opportunity to question it inclading the cross-examination of any witnesses. The employee must also be afforded the opportunity to present his or her side of the case and if necessary, call is or her own evidence and witnesses. Dipindai dengan CamScannernny sanction, There should be a break between th roallow the manager [0 consider his or her dee at : 7 i ‘ae course of action. The purpose OF thy vee is fully aware of why discip}j Is oye I hy disc Plinary pnistering displ vever short, £0 i I appropri 2. Adm two stages, how sion and determine th second stage sco ensure Cat the employee 1 of the sanction being applied and its flier p, the nature haviour or performance expected n the fisture ary interview is that the manager Prejfudy, : : cs part of the preparation for the lites ; action is being taker and the standard of be Am inherent danger in the diseiph the situation because he or she has, already investigated management’s case and examined the em ‘ a 8 a Va nployee’s Vid record. This can result i fe abet iployee’s previous ecord, This can result in the two stages becoming blurred and the man; ager rinanig he employee before all the evidence has been heard and consi vee he interview should never commence with the manage: i msidered anager reprimanding the employee forthe slege oflence, lose thei heir empl loyme: the hatter cire nent), less emori Ve terms « that CMS ‘dese. redund; Dipindai dengan CamScannerGrievance, di EE liscipline and tedundancy Procedures sg3 job for those The perspective of the labour planner, Period of time in the organisation FEO" to the implementation ot a pro Eanme involving involuntary quits” and which tiene redundancy as an clement in balancing the organisations labour requirement. Certainly, Mumford noted that ‘for the manpower planner, redundancy is generally seen as synonymous with failure’ W_ The perspective of the labour. ation of, and adjustment Views redundancy as ar which focuses attention on ‘that Sconomist, which focuses attention on the oper: * processes in, the external labour market® and which means of redistributing labour within the economy. Both of these perspectives incorporate a managerial ideology which emphasises the goal of operational efficiency at either the micro or macro level and accepts the legitimacy of redundancy as a means of achieving that efficiency. The perspective of the industrial sociologist, which focuses attention on the differing value systems which exist within socie and the organisation and ohah piezita wt tk arises because out 36 sgards unémplo Dipindai dengan CamScanneree ant of both the goal (operations, es eyritimmacy 5 enor apres, te fore, he legitimacy jther unquestionable nor agreed therefore, which, : efficiency) and the me: s amvong the participant ards th ima | sae) 8 icy towards redun. hifts in government policy towae dict n fare a ann san the influence of these perspectives Sith idan res of changes I Redundancy Payments See Chapter 8- y cam be explained in te sitomised in the Red y The goverment HOY et pol aot anevyny involve the private individual in UK porcin ¢hough redundancy may . S va that ‘although edn ing redeployment of labour (1965), as that though Jong run the resulting redeploy ) Sho a enefigal™. Inthe 1970s, however, government policy se rr ey gin att cheapest mexe of job creation = COW ‘recognition tha H s 5 shifed ite towards pee tent Consequently, government actions, such inthe short run was job pres z Ese eae etbeato as the Temporary Employment Subsidy (1975), were directed a iB redundancies. The change in policy was closely associated with a change in the , with an unemployment level of only 1-2 redundancy could be justitied as a uals who were made redun- | inthe level of unemployment. In the 1960s, pe ent (i. fill or over fll employment), p aa yeu 5 mmcans of treing’a scarce resource, while the individ rant were no ikl to be unemployed for long. By the mid te lane 1970s, unem- Spam wa 5 per cent and rising, and therefone redone v could be seen as goverment at vel and retng a sxil a pola problem for any frvemmene which was commited wo ara Oa ‘y of ma y yme} Inte Babs and 950, ee PLY Of mining il employence Is perpeci Redindny ca eM ed back oa touk ro cdaney and its associated unenssfee ines ancy a ‘nployment have been se (Silt of Wage inflation and a neeeeen POY s been seen as © Scructurat deat wral decline of olde develope, manent a Benerally less etice & Decrease in hy Level of ec I €COy on Dipindai dengan CamScannerGe ———__ Grievance, dicing anom- ic ahead?§3, Ndication thar INION acc rR a S they CY (thus wy cy in a n ' hi hon Ncies Within at 800d iy) Pen ony to om i “™Ployees Some : Moyers through in smaBemeng, > Vee, then jp Pai Aandi; Second op. rae to ling of © rest ject FSton ep emp itiy a ve © COnce, Dipindai dengan CamScannerip Retraining and transfers Use of alters 8 to balance i native methods of overtime, a sto ~ stoy il Me, a stop on rec sibly cease Et sub ru ibly an increase in subg outracting wor a short-time workir ‘ontracting redundancy wi be certa : ith unio; in, before sures will, on its own, be inset a £0 establish tons However, even insufficient eon ti thst the eet el fi esi 3 even at ti te osu sirable, forthe organi ot dandingy he retired bur ae may still be Necessary ION to stop all recruitms 'Y not be possible, of luc. 0 maintain th lent oF over ven in the recruit time working. It are primarily t0 resist, or minimise, che red i " , che reduc. possible terms for those paradise i ee eee ‘se are generally as co estes is is concerned to ensure th ead ee ee sure that all alternatives are consid oloyees are made redundant as they rppeees mp) they are to ensue that red a bes possible financial compensation for the loss sree pe However, withis ae Homerer pati the employees? ranks there is, ifthe financial compere i mewn enough, often a divergence in attitudes berween the union’s desire to resist redundancies and the desire of at least some : employ y resi edn jployees actually to be made Selection criteria “The indiscriminate application of any selection cnvterOl! can ‘result in a work- Fence incapable of producing anything Ti important therefore, to focus rere on decisions cowards furare workforce nests (7 of the quality of cere kil, abilities and porental needed for future business operations) nd Pogetins in current numbers oF cost. Te e ry within which the selection criteria are Santee the organisation 352 whole or within i Segmented basis? The varying elect can Os Fy straighnforvacd ‘st, fst owe eT ely iol, i could result mn an unaccepbe Hoteparments with a high proportion of shore ach department separately cl n he Npeng made redundant i One ACES moles ees ce dearer wn er se in pat, related co the eet hich knowledge an aig 1 and, therefore, how quickly employees can adapt aby gedaan employees: Hovey sere organisations are ‘cated OO OF ros dtion in outpu ofthat department redundancies if Se sae mored), Fred ro the act jeparemen or section 3 _ ae Dipindai dengan CamScanner——— — ance ao i ches may be applied in selec ofthe following approaches may be apf ainyees co be made redundant: ing this approach is that the Jinciple underlying this app ‘The principle un his approach is thatthe 1. Voluntary severance, 1 "pianaeine should decide we re employee, Fate” tees traumatic. for the organisation and employees eta sr employees, those likely s u ‘ ely to volunteer. é : sek ey is approach, by reserving the right to refuse Coe aa ieee whom it considers to be essential ro fature opera- te ae oftheir skill, work performance or experience. To encourage tons by vitae oftheir skill, work cr expe volunteers, itis usual for management to offer enh: acon ‘One, or acon 1 cular employ ing the particula ed redundancy com- sation above the minimum required under the redundancy payments le Elation (including early retirement, without loss of pension rights, for older employees), thereby increasing the costs of the redundancy. ‘Trade unions will normally seck to ensure that no employees, such as the long-term sick or those with poor work records, are pressurised into ‘volunteering’ to be made redundant, In the past it was believed that voluntary severance would be successful only on a ‘one-ofP basis and if the level of required redundancy was 10-20 per cent. If lower than 10 per cent, there may be too many falunteers (requiring further selection eriteria to be applied and the pos puliy that some volunteers may feel aggrieved because their expectation of keaving with enhanced compensation has not been met). If higher than 20 Par an there may be insufficient volunteers (requiring additicnal compul- Shuy redundancies). However, the experience of the 1980s and 1990s has ae at oteaniscons aan repeatedly operate a voluntary severance pro- mu at the peotuneeets. Such apparent ‘success? raises ing ti iestions about the ‘success’ of other FIRM strategies i Porat Gmpoyee commitment 10 the organisation Indeed ga, veloping nny cule itn Which ‘employees will be plese, * CaN lead to a 2 planning for their tit Oppor- -tEEM prospects With the ee (LIPO). The principle underly Zz a" Plovee’s service yw: 2 implied right to + on ith an organis ing ts approach is that the ation, the greater a » the greater his or } utionally been favoured by many ads y many le hich PPears to avoid it is relatively «pon h oweven ere ee (less Compensation for ae for Management that gh balance of employee ation iS completely eee Se employees and is very liked Skills, abilities and © ensuring the rool in ag ae Of the link Ween ane tial needed f the : *Bansstion and ne Profile for the ¢ Po length of Service, ¢ e itca labour planni, “S remaining i” » I can lead Plannin Ing in home Of longed £4 divideq Workfor Si coblem for the an “Service I Teatin, ia : ployers lie loyees. 1 yes alongside Sreetively Pro- coy i oF at isk OF beta ‘ 8 ploy ual general ine Stoup of re du; , mor ths © made redu, many NCE becary, nt, they are Dipindai dengan CamScannerrr. T, trade y feel it is open to abuse by mange its adoption, insist on ee management in its select eee clection decisions and hi Ni bhai they fel that they have been tang Peal on his approach is dependent on manage - ving adequate info: mation relat a relating to individual employee perform: ct. y ance and approach, 4. Social need. Ie is uncor determining additional specal conperenton oy corsa determining addon spec cmenstion or stance redundant employees However, Mumford” ced one example vhs domestic ci- a aril stan number of children and whether the amples waste le family income) were combined with efficiency and leng of serie stra on weighted points basis. Under this sche lomestic circumstances could amount to a maximum of 100 = against a maximum of only 50 points for length of service i Level of compensation It has been suggested that ‘many companies announce redundancies to cut costs and remain competitive but are stil largely profitable, and therefore can afford to be relatively generous’**. In addition t0 any general enhancement of the legal minimum, to make the redundancy easier (0 implement, the organisation may also make provision for extra nancial compensation not catered for within hese may include the following: the statutory scheme. T yes specil «d by the starucory scheme, such a8 Payment ro employees specifically excluded by Moho with less than wo years” Service OF those under 18 years of B65 ; Assessment ‘of compensation at the employee's fall rate of pay rather than the ‘maximum limit specified in elegans gant ye Compensation based on the employee's rota service rather [ nae specified in the legislation; . 2 pean of je Extra payments ‘0 those employees above # particular dah \ oe red t0 ain beyond tf | for employees requ a w Ascii ete Pend the date at which the bulk of employee date they W3 to nee are to be made redundant oo copys pos been ge prior gi Payment in liew of notice event notification of dismissals | etl Dipindai dengan CamScanner596 cs who, alter a specified period, ment or who have had to g hardship payments to empl Continuing hardship pay oy have been unable to secure alternative emplo aveept employment at a significantly lower rate of pay. Assistance to redundant employees ‘As a statutory minimum, the employer is required to notily the Depart for Education and Employment of any redundancy in excess of ten employees and allow redundant employees reasonable time off to seek work or retraininy However, the employer may be able to provide additional assistance in a number of ways: m Providing on-site facilities for the state agencies to attend to advise employ- ces on job oppornunities, retraining schemes and facilities, unemployment and other state benefits; Establishing their own ‘employment agency’ to contact associated companies or other employers in the locality or elsewhere to try to sccure alternative work for their redundant employees; f@ Maintaining a list of redundant employe employment should circumstances impro. ‘The employer may also go beyond simply helping the employee to secure new employment and may, through cither the HRM department or consultants, provide wider individual employee counselling. This may include the following: 1 Discussing with the employee not only possible future carcers and retraining but also the question of the individual starting a business; @ Financial guidance on coping with unemployment and making the best use of the redundancy payment; 1 Self-appraisal and presentation skills (many employees may not have had to apply and be interviewed for a job for many years); The psychological aspects of redundancy for both the individual es who will be given preference for or a vacaney arise. and family: Indeed, management may go so far as to provide or pay for redundant employees to attend special courses on any of these topics Communication, consultation and negotiation Hr may be argued that there is never a ‘vight’ time to tell employees of a poten- tial redundancy in the organisation because this is likely to result in a lowerin of employee morale by creating a feeling of insecurity. Some would argue that Sich information should be delayed for as long as possible and only moved \when management believes that an effect on employment is likely, Hleweves i Dipindai dengan CamScannerWm Recognised trade uni a sions about the meee a ues unions will be involved in discus- Sng the ypes and numbers af employes tw be mele ealecone ena De uneslat to capeet at of employes to be mae redundant. 1 weld im secrecy the once beni feprseiatives to emer ito such discussions ona able to discuss the issues with their members if they ire both to represent their members interests and make a realistic contrbar tion in any discussions with management. i sien eden repo sentatives may be involved, jointh Bicgernehi ia ippvice Ge aed seco cra! Pe involved, jondly with management, in applying the agreed cee normally, they will be notified by management of he employ cted for redundancy and may subsequently be involved in Processing grievances on behalf of their members in respect of their selection for redundancy or the level of compensation they are to receive Employees (both as a group and the individuals selected for redundancy). It is important that all employees should receive regular communications regard- ig the progress of discussions with the trade unions and the subsequent implementation of the redundancy programme. Similarly, those to be made redundant should be informed individually by their manager and have the opportunity to discuss their position, It is also important for management not to forget thar ‘the needs of the “survivors” may also have to be addressed’*® — they need to be ‘revitalised’. Management. All levels of management, but particularly departmental and supervisory management, have to be kept informed and be sufficiently briefed to be able to answer most of the initial questions raised by employees and correct any rumours or misunderstandings. It is of paramount impor- tance that they should nor feel that union representatives have been given more information than they have. rhe prievance/dispute process is an integral part of determining 2s well Be ee ping rand ts efeceees cles on employee 3% Tonon acceptance of its incegrity and usefulness in rsoWing dissatisfaction. ' While the formal disciplinary process is @ management contol process pe ed 10 ‘penalise’ employees whose performance or DeNit T M vieement’s expectations, the disciplinary proce in i i met arabe ys eno eempey outside world. : > objectives in any redundancy situ ant’s objectives in any reduny 0 ceed labour ees while maintaining the morale and goodwill ofa furure a coe nts objectives ae tO Fess, OF minimise balanced wren redundancy while securing the best ves Panty 1 of, pe xeon a asian for hse who are ma fundant com ration are to reduce its labour Dipindai dengan CamScanner